BBC iPlayer loophole to be closed and also ad blockers to be looked at

[Glaucus]

They either go down the advertisement route like the other channels or have it as a paid subscription like Sky et al.

I quite literally watch nothing on the BBC or listen to its radio services, iPlayer, etc. Why should I be forced to pay for it?

Because like lots of other non essential government services, it's deemed good for the county.
Why do people think BBC is a private company who can just do what they want.
They can't, license fee is officially recognised as a tax (hence the punishments for not paying) and BBC has to follow the charter which includes making regional and educational programming which isn't commercially viable. As well as creating and providing a wide range of other content.

Go subscription based like Sky, Virgin etc or start advertising on TV.

Exactly, and if it's good enough people will pay for it.

They aren't anything lie virgin, sky etc. They can't just do what they want, they're already paid in taxes and they ae dictated to about what they can and can't do.

 

[pinkpill]

The industry created the problem for themselves, back in the early 2000's. Ad's wasn't a problem, I would happily browse a websites with minimal ad's, small banner at the top, small ad in the corner, no ad block was needed.

Until websites starting throwing massive ad's taking up the whole screen before you can read an article or a clip blasting out randomly after a few seconds browsing a website. THERE IS NO NEED FOR FOR IT! What was wrong with the model they had years ago?!?!!? Now cyber criminals know how to hi-jack ad's with malware and infect peoples computers.

Ad-blockers are not going away any time soon and I will continue to use them. If they cant find better and more appropriate ways to make money then tough! They had their chance and abused it.

I agree the ads these days are too much.

 

[Deleted member 77746]

Surely all they would have to do is attach an email to the accounts of the people who has a TV licence and then when the user logs in they can play the live content. They should have done this from the start of introducing online content.

Yes, I know people can just 'share' the accounts but Netflix e.t.c manage it OK.

 

[Glaucus]

They should have done this from the start of introducing online content.

They couldn't it requires a change in law, again BBC isn't a private company that can do what they want.

 

[diamount]

Go subscription based like Sky, Virgin etc or start advertising on TV.

How is that any different from what they're doing right now? You pay, essentially an annual subscription.

 

[diamount]

But it's different isn't it? It's not a subscription for X amount of channels, its to effectively own and operate a TV. You have to pay it regardless of whether you watch the BBC or not which is just plain wrong in this day and age.

No, you don't. I don't see this getting passed into legislation but until then it's optional if you don't watch live TV.

 

[Glaucus]

But it's different isn't it? It's not a subscription for X amount of channels, its to effectively own and operate a TV. You have to pay it regardless of whether you watch the BBC or not which is just plain wrong in this day and age.

Your stilt ignoring the fact that BBC is nothing like other channels. They have a mandate they have to follow. That includes tuff that is commercially unviable. They have to di regional, education, uk created content etc. That it is seen as good for the country and as such is funded by a tax.
You and others like you are a minority but growing. So even if it went to a referendum, then the BBC would stay and still be tax funded

If you get rid of the tax, you would have to allow BBC to do what they want which would mean losing all the minority programing egg the educational/regional stuff.

 

[Deleted member 77746]

They couldn't it requires a change in law, again BBC isn't a private company that can do what they want.

Well then they need to change the law. It will only gt worse as time goes on.

 

[Glaucus]

Well then they need to change the law. It will only gt worse as time goes on.

They are that's what is in the OP, the sectory of state for media, will change the law as soon as he can so they can implement a system where you require a TV license to use iplayer.

Speaking later, Mr Whittingdale said an order would have to be drafted and agreed by Parliament on the licensing change, which he would try to get passed "as soon as we can".

 

[Tefal]

Because like lots of other non essential government services, it's deemed good for the county.
Why do people think BBC is a private company who can just do what they want.
They can't, license fee is officially recognised as and BBC has to follow the charter which includes making regional and educational programming which isn't commercially viable. As well as creating and providing a wide range of other content.





They aren't anything lie virgin, sky etc. They can't just do what they want, they're already paid in taxes and they ae dictated to about what they can and can't do.

It also includes research and development of new technology and sgandards for broadcasting

 

[Tefal]

And this is the crux of the matter. The BBC absolutely KNOW this, the hardcore BBC fans will pay for a subscription but the majority won't because they put out a load of crap. There is very little in the way of good programming.

This is true, outside of pannel shows really evefything the bbc do comedy wise has a feel like itnwas filmed and written as a college project

 

[Glaucus]

Because that's all they show,
No science shows, documantries or anything else.

Guess what it's Not just about you.

And yes you are in the minority(most polls show that, whenever t's asked the majority poll on keeping it). Even the polls which are "for scrapping" are still only like 49% in favour of scrapping TV license. Opinion is undoubtedly changing, but we aren't there yet.

Perhaps you should go read the charter, so you at least understand what they have to produce and why it's seen as good for the country and hence why it's paid for by tax.
And why BBC could not run as a normal commercial channel in it's current form.

 

[d_brennen]

Because that's all they show,
No science shows, documantries or anything else.

Guess what it's Not just about you.

And yet even if the BBC holds no value for you, you need to pay to watch live TV. It's all a bit window tax-like imo

 

[Glaucus]

And yet even if the BBC holds no value for you, you need to pay to watch live TV. It's all a bit window tax-like imo

Again this is no different to a lot of government tax spending. Lots off things don't directly help you. Yet you still pay tax to fund those services.

Imp everyone simplifies it to much, I tithing BBC should be split into two. One becomes a commercial channel, the other is funded by central government, get rid of all the wasted money in letters, enforcement etc. And fund things that are worth while. Not just clones of what other channels do. So all the day time stuff can go to the chimerical arm, news(although should be more accountable and stricter in their news), regional educational and the likes can stay being funded by tax.

 

[Glaucus]

A)yes it s a minority and B) as I said that's one poll which is by far leans the most towards your feelings and yet still doesn't cross 50%, most polls find it far less.

 

[d_brennen]

Again this is no different to a lot of government tax spending. Lots off things dint directly help you. Yet type still pay tax to fund those services.

We're talking about the idiot box here, not healthcare, education, defence etc. The fact viewers have no choice but to pay an any amount to an arbitrarily appointed organisation for entertainment (which is available elsewhere ad or sub based) is quite archaic. Lots of younger people see it this way too, hence the TV Licensing folks having a boner for uni students lately...

 

[Glaucus]

We're talking about the idiot box here, not healthcare, education, defence etc. The fact viewers have no choice but to pay an any amount to an arbitrarily appointed organisation for entertainment (which is available elsewhere ad or sub based) is quite archaic. Lots of younger people see it this way too, hence the TV Licensing folks having a boner for uni students lately...

You think that's all the government finds?
And no it's not all available elsewhere. A good proportion of there programming by mandate is fir stuff that isn't available elsewhere.

 

[d_brennen]

You think that's all the government finds?
And no it's not all available elsewhere. A good proportion of there programming by mandate is fir stuff that isn't available elsewhere.

Can we petition the Beeb to fund you a better autocorrect? It's for the public good

 

[Glaucus]

Gladly.
IOs, android and windows. All seem to be rubbish as everyone complains regardless of the machine I use.

 

[Glaucus]

Well going on you're 'minority' just under half the country disagree with you.

And I fully believe you are in minority all by yourself thinking its 'seen as good for the country'.

Rofl, you like ignoring stuff dint you, again thats one poll. Most poles seem to be around 60% in favour.
You don't think creating region and educational programs aren't good fir the country?

I never said I think it's good for the country, a lot of people do and that is why it exists and supported by tax.
I've already partly said how I feel.
I'm 100% for scrapping license fee. I'm 50/50 funding from central tax, it all depends what standards BBC is held to and what they produce.

However most of the comments in here, yours including show you and others really are clueless about the BBc in general and that's not a good position to form any choices on.